Following up on
yesterday's post about the Chicago media, here's
one more from the Gary Post-Trib, from a guy I've never heard of, Mike Hutton. The headline is "Williams has earned benef it [sic] of doubt," but you wouldn't know it from the column after the first two and a half graphs:
Cut Kenny Williams some slack. Just a little. Give him maybe an inch or two.
As much as it pains me to say that about the in-your-face, combative
general manager for the White Sox, Williams has banked some credit
because of the 2005 World Series championship team.
There is no reason just yet to dump your Sox season tickets. Keep the
garbage can handy, though. They could be deposited there before spring
starts, depending on what other moves the Sox make.
He ends where he starts, with a tentative thumbs-sideways, but in the middle is meandering, stream-of-consciousness prose that says Williams is unlikeable and Jerry Reinsdorf is cheap. He also cites the David Wells trade as a "sour deal" even though at worst it was garbage in, garbage out, and writes a "they're" when he meant "their."
Somehow, he still manages to write the most positive column in town.
Yesterday I compared
the columnists and the bloggers, but you don't even need to leave the medium to notice a divide. Look at what the beat writers are saying:
(I couldn't draw a bead on Mark Gonzalez's viewpoint one way or another. Make sure to check out Whalen's entry -- it's rather scathing.)
Two out of three beat writers agree, and even Gregor's commentary vouched for "wait and see." So what does it say when the guys who are with the team every day say one thing, and the more distant parties are saying another? I have three guesses:
- Columnists don't have to worry as much about pissing off the people they cover; the writers are being over-accommodating.
- The beat writers have a better sense of how the organization is operating, and columnists are making wrong assumptions.
- The columnists aren't saying what they think, instead opting to "start a conversation."
I'm trying to make sure to be fair to the columnists because I don't particularly care that they share an opposing viewpoint. Instead, I'm more curious as to why each "voice" who opined on a very complicated deal came to the exact same conclusion. I'm seeing about a 50/50 split on message boards about the trade, and both sides' viewpoints are easy to understand, so I don't get how each columnist saw it only one way. I suppose Reinsdorf does make a very tempting pinata for numerous reasons.
The best piece I've seen on this was from
ESPN.com's Jayson Stark; a very balanced, bittersweet, and -- most importantly -- mellow look at the deal using exclusive quotes from Williams (or at least ones I haven't seen anywhere else).
At any rate, I'm probably indulging myself more than most of you with this media stuff, but this might be the end of it for now. The Garcia trade -- and the subsequent Astros rumors -- have me in a bit of a holding pattern, especially since Houston owner Drayton McLane said he's
"not going to give up" on dealing with the White Sox after the departure of Andy Pettitte.